3 ms·

> [SW's] police report states that, after Assange woke her up trying to initiate intercourse, the two had a conversation in which she asked Assange whether he w

> [SW's] police report states that, after Assange woke her up trying to initiate intercourse, the two had a conversation in which she asked Assange whether he was wearing a condom and he replied he was not. She then said he “would better not have HIV” and he replied that he did not, after which, she “let him continue” (lät honom fortsätta) to have unprotected intercourse. There are no indications of coercive or incapacitating circumstances suggesting lack of consent. Accordingly, Chief Prosecutor for Stockholm Eva Finne stated: “I do not think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape” and closed the case on 25 August 2010 concluding that the “conduct alleged by SW disclosed no crime at all”. From https://medium.com/@njmelzer/response-to-open-letter-of-1-july-2019-7222083dafc8 https://medium.com/@njmelzer/response-to-open-letter-of-1-ju...

mjg59 2y ago
After the women's representative petitioned for the case to be reexamined, a prosecutor with more experience of sexual assault concluded that the alleged facts amounted to rape - see https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklagare.se/en/nyheter--press/media/the-assange-matter/chronology/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklag...
- henryaj 2y ago
  Thanks. I guess that's the '27 August 2010' update in that document - is there more to read on it somewhere? The doc I linked suggested it was the police who modified SW's statement, which triggered the re-evaluation of the case. "AA took SW to a police station, so SW could enquire whether she could force Assange to take an HIV-test. There, they were questioned together by an investigating officer who knew AA personally and ran on the same political party ticket as AA in the general elections three weeks later. When superior investigators insisted on registering SW’s enquiry as a report of “rape” and to immediately issue an arrest warrant against Assange, SW reportedly refused to sign her statement and became so emotionally distraught that the questioning had to be suspended. While at the police station, SW even texted that she “did not want to put any charges on Julian Assange” but that “the police were keen on getting their hands on him” (14:26); and that she was “chocked (sic shocked) when they arrested him” because she “only wanted him to take a test” (17:06). Once Chief Prosecutor Finné had intervened and closed the case, it reportedly was again the police (not SW) who “revised” her statement lodged in the police system to better fit the crime of “rape” before it was resubmitted by a third Social Democrat politician to a different prosecutor who was prepared to re-open the case."
  - mjg59 2y ago
    The "Social Democrat politician" was Claes Borgström (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m) - calling him a politician without noting that he was a qualified lawyer with a track record in representing women in sexual assault and trafficking cases is incredibly misleading.
    - henryaj 2y ago
      Is it? It's missing context but it's not misrepresenting the facts of the case.

mjg59 2y ago

After the women's representative petitioned for the case to be reexamined, a prosecutor with more experience of sexual assault concluded that the alleged facts amounted to rape - see https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklagare.se/en/nyheter--press/media/the-assange-matter/chronology/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklag...

henryaj 2y ago
Thanks. I guess that's the '27 August 2010' update in that document - is there more to read on it somewhere? The doc I linked suggested it was the police who modified SW's statement, which triggered the re-evaluation of the case. "AA took SW to a police station, so SW could enquire whether she could force Assange to take an HIV-test. There, they were questioned together by an investigating officer who knew AA personally and ran on the same political party ticket as AA in the general elections three weeks later. When superior investigators insisted on registering SW’s enquiry as a report of “rape” and to immediately issue an arrest warrant against Assange, SW reportedly refused to sign her statement and became so emotionally distraught that the questioning had to be suspended. While at the police station, SW even texted that she “did not want to put any charges on Julian Assange” but that “the police were keen on getting their hands on him” (14:26); and that she was “chocked (sic shocked) when they arrested him” because she “only wanted him to take a test” (17:06). Once Chief Prosecutor Finné had intervened and closed the case, it reportedly was again the police (not SW) who “revised” her statement lodged in the police system to better fit the crime of “rape” before it was resubmitted by a third Social Democrat politician to a different prosecutor who was prepared to re-open the case."
- mjg59 2y ago
  The "Social Democrat politician" was Claes Borgström (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m) - calling him a politician without noting that he was a qualified lawyer with a track record in representing women in sexual assault and trafficking cases is incredibly misleading.
  - henryaj 2y ago
    Is it? It's missing context but it's not misrepresenting the facts of the case.